Editorial: Fixing the mess at the Massachusetts crime lab

Wednesday

Jul 25, 2007 at 12:01 AMJul 25, 2007 at 10:34 AM

Let's clear the current backlog and start systematically setting the record straight on cases previously closed.

By The MetroWest Daily News

The mess at the state police crime lab is difficult to fathom: Evidence samples from thousands of crime scenes, dating back 20 years or more, were simply not tested. A state investigation revealed that DNA tests on evidence involving 16,000 cases were not done; 4,000 rape kits containing biological evidence were never even opened.

Defenders of the Sudbury facility cite new technology and lack of staffing for the backlog, and the new report, done by an independent consulting company, agrees. But we can't help but recall the mail carrier that dumped bags of mail in the woods because he didn't have time to deliver it. Such negligence is inexcusable.

If this mess is hard to describe, it will be doubly difficult to clean up. Even in the cases resolved years ago, there are victims and defendants who must be wondering how things might have been different if the State Police crime lab had done its job. They deserve some consideration.

Then there's the backlog of 2,000 cases awaiting trial for which the evidence has yet to be tested. One of these cases is nationally known: that of Neil Entwistle, due to face trial this fall for killing his wife and infant daughter in their Hopkinton home. His lawyer says the trial may be delayed because the State Police crime lab has yet to test evidence submitted more than five months ago.

State officials say the Entwistle evidence will be analyzed in time, and we hope that's true. Now that the problem has been exposed, the state should get on top of the backlogged tests, contracting them out if needed, especially for the highest priority cases. Justice delayed is justice denied.

But the lower profile cases deserve attention as well. Even in cases long closed, or cases where the statute of limitations has expired, the state has a moral obligation to analyze evidence wherever it can shed light on what really happened.

It can start by making public the 16,000 cases. Officials have so far refused to do so, but we hope they will respond positively to a request from an association of Massachusetts public defenders. Not every sample needs to be tested. There may well be cases already resolved in which further evidence is unnecessary. But there are also cases in which no arrest has been made, cases where the evidence tests may point to a suspect. And there are cases in which an innocent person may have been convicted.

An independent auditor must sift through the cases and make a recommendation as to whether the sample should be tested. Such a decision should be appealable by both defendant and prosecutors. Let's clear the current backlog and start systematically setting the record straight on cases previously closed.

``It's not just about convictions,'' Essex District Attorney Jonathan W. Blodgett said this week, a point the state police should remember. It's about determining the truth. That's going to take time and money, but it must be done.

Community groups

Original content available for non-commercial use under a Creative Commons license, except where noted.
The Sudbury Town Crier ~ 33 New York Ave., Framingham MA 01701 ~ Privacy Policy ~ Terms Of Service